Weird to see a bipod on an M-4. Seems unessessary. Even with all the components, it Should be light enough to support easily in any position.

it's not the weight that matters it's the stability. You're not going to be as accurate holding a rifle in two hands as you will prone(or seated) at a bench with a bipod supporting the rifle. A light weapon is you're less likely to struggle with holding but it still won't be as stable as a supported weapon.

__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t*rd by the clean end"

it's not the weight that matters it's the stability. You're not going to be as accurate holding a rifle in two hands as you will prone(or seated) at a bench with a bipod supporting the rifle. A light weapon is you're less likely to struggle with holding but it still won't be as stable as a supported weapon.

Agreed. All I'm saying is that the shooter shouldn't need a bipod on an M4 in order to shoot accurately. Personally, I would much rather have a broomstick in place if the bipod. Then I know I could train my weapon downrange quickly and accurately. I just don't feel like a shooter, in a real world scenario, would often need to place a well aimed shot from the prone where the bipods would add significtly more value than just good solid bone support w/o the bipod. It's looks like a nice setup, it's just curious to see the bipod.

Agreed. All I'm saying is that the shooter shouldn't need a bipod on an M4 in order to shoot accurately. Personally, I would much rather have a broomstick in place if the bipod. Then I know I could train my weapon downrange quickly and accurately. I just don't feel like a shooter, in a real world scenario, would often need to place a well aimed shot from the prone where the bipods would add significtly more value than just good solid bone support w/o the bipod. It's looks like a nice setup, it's just curious to see the bipod.

It's really all about the range you're shooting at, < 200 yards and it probably doesn't make a huge difference. If you start shooting long range(and it's one of the reasons the AR-15 is a popular match rifle), then even small movements can throw you way off target.

That's why I like the concept of the grippod. It's seems like a decent compromise between the two!

__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t*rd by the clean end"

It's actually easier to shoot a non-pistol griped gun from the hip than one with.

It's nothing more than a scary term. The dumb ****ing na´ve liberals in this country hear it and go apeshit retard over the term, without a clue on what it is. It just sounds bad to them. Same reason the last ban featured removal of such other evil words;

Barrel shroud... Oh my, the shoulder thing that goes up?, or maybe it just prevents a person from touching a hot barrel. A safety feature. Oh my god! We must ban it!
Bayonet lug... Oh my, that sounds so evil, a person could mount a knife to the end of a gun and stab someone if they run out of ammo. Despite the fact that a bayonet mounted to a rifle has never been used in a crime to date. We must ban it.

Flash hider... Personally I can't recall one instance of a shooter being located by the flash signature that would have otherwise went unnoticed. But yet it sounds evil, we must ban it!

Collapsible stock... Oh my god!!! A criminal might be able to reduce the outline of their rifle from 32" to 26". Holy shit. Disregard the fact that they could just mount a shorter stock to begin with, or remove it altogether. Nope we need to ban it. After all why would we want to allow women, who generally prefer a shorter stock, to use one more comfortably. Why does the left hate women so much?